Aerocaribbean ATR crash in Cuba

[punkalouver]

As reported on BBC

[The Ancient Geek]

BBC News - Passenger plane crashes in Cuba (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11700265)

[very ex-ba]

State media: "ATR 72 twin-turboprop aircraft was carrying 61 passengers and seven crew members when it went down near Guasimal. No survivors were found" Flight No.7L883

&L operating Flight schedule for the route : MO, TH, FR, SU 18.30h - 20.30h
though have come across the following:"it went down near the town of Guasimal in Sancti Spiritus Province at approximately 5.42 p.m. local time."

There seems to be a discrepancy in the scheduled flight timings /and the crash time. Truth will out in due course I am sure.

[bizjets101]

Unconfirmed as follows,

Twitter reports; Flight 883 from Aerocaribbean down in central Cuba. ATR-72-202. 61 pax, 7 crew. 40 Cubans, 28 foreign. Reports of no survivors.

Weird, my post clearly states 'Twitter reports, but comes across as pprune reports'.

[Bolli]

according to wikipedia (the most trusted source of all) it was the 737-200 that crashed

On 5th November 2010 the Boeing 737 crashed, killing all crew and 60 passengers 28 of which were holiday makers.

[Machaca]

http://i337.photobucket.com/albums/n385/motidog/CubaAerocarr-01.jpg

[pattern_is_full]

Plane with at least 68 aboard crashes in Cuba | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6A40A320101105)

Guasimal is substantially further west than the edges of that wind map - but that doesn't rule out weather. It can change fast. Story mentions emergency call from crew. Also IDs aircraft as ATR.

[goldenrivet]

Aircraft down in Cuba,scant information so far,anyone know more?

[Mariner]

According to Luchtvaartnieuws.nl it was an ATR-72 of Areo Carribbean.
En route from Santiago in eastern Cuba, to Havanna.
They report it happened in cruise.

68 souls.

[Newforest2]

No survivors. :(

68 killed in Cuban plane crash - CNN.com (http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/11/05/cuba.plane.crash/index.html?eref=rss_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+%28RSS%3A+Top+Stor ies%29&v_t=keyword_rollover)

[slatch]

looking at the colors and reg, may be AEROCARIBBEAN ATR CU-T1545

[CabinMaster]

Difficult to identify by the reg, as the airline has several ATR72s with pretty much the same registration:

453 (http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-453.htm) 72-212 08/03/2006 CU-T1548 (http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-453.htm)
459 (http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-459.htm) 72-212 23/10/2006 CU-T1549 (http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-459.htm)
472 (http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-472.htm) 72-212 04/05/2004 CU-T1544 (http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-472.htm)
473 (http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-473.htm) 72-212 29/03/2004 CU-T1545 (http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-473.htm)
485 (http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-485.htm) 72-212 21/05/2005 CU-T1547 (http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-485.htm)

[Blind Squirrel]

Associated Press drops a heavy hint that the a/c might have been caught by Tropical Storm Tomas. Possibly something to it: the METARs at the nearest reporting station (MUSC, admittedly about 50 nm to the NW) show some convective activity around the time of the accident, though nothing very unusual. But the flight was heading in the opposite direction to the storm. Again, more information required on this one.


MUSC 042353Z 25004KT 9000 BKN020CB 23/22 Q1007
MUSC 042252Z 28006KT 8000 BKN020CB 24/22 Q1006
MUSC 042152Z 23006KT 8000 BKN020CB 26/22 Q1005
MUSC 042055Z 26004KT 9000 FEW020 BKN100 26/23 Q1005

[superspotter]

It has been posted elsewhere that the aircraft in question was CU-T1549.

[Super VC-10]

Presumably the "elsewhere" is Wikipedia. That info should not be taken as confirmation as it is unsourced.

Aero Caribbean Flight 883 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_Caribbean_Flight_883)

[twochai]

Sounds remarkably similar to witness statements describing the recent ATR accident in Venezuela?

[fr8dawg27]

additional info about this sad accident is also available at this
cuban government website: cubadebate.cu (in spanish only)
including: info about the crash, photos,crew and pax names lists.
note: please do not post c/m and pax lists. thank you.

fr8d27

[FougaMagister]

From Aviation Safety Network:

ASN Aircraft accident ATR-72-212 CU-T1549 Guasimal, Sancti Spiritus Province (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20101104-0)

Cheers :cool:

[MineDog]

Through the grapevine:

Uncontained engine fire?

RIP pax & crew

[WHBM]

Uncontained engine fire?
Are Cubana able to obtain Pratt & Whitney engine parts for the ATR through official channels, notwithstanding the US embargo on exports to Cuba ? Does assembly of these engines in Montreal manage to get around these restrictions.

[El_Presidente]

Prop look feathered to you? There was a picture I saw of the prop in place, can't find it now...and could be impact damage, but looks feathered to me...

RIP.


http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20101106/capt.cabb855859d44dec9c91b82ac8972401-cabb855859d44dec9c91b82ac8972401-0.jpg?x=400&y=266&q=85&sig=8juz6rrJbHkasnvVjuabdw--

Found it...

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/rids/20101106/i/r4143026724.jpg?x=395&y=345&q=85&sig=hN86xYXpHjAIfY6z1oTZEQ--
http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//101106/481/urn_publicid_ap_org_b7e92a99f95545babf65b1f6716c91b6/#photoViewer=/101106/481/urn_publicid_ap_org_cabb855859d44dec9c91b82ac8972401

[twochai]

Yes, it certainly looks feathered, however that is meaningless. The blades are designed to go to the feather position in any shutdown event, normal or abnormal.

Failure of the propellor to feather after any shutdown event would be a big concern.

[jcjeant]

Hi,

Yes, it certainly looks feathered, however that is meaningless. The blades are designed to go to the feather position in any shutdown event, normal or abnormal.

Failure of the propellor to feather after any shutdown event would be a big concern.

Well .. it's not meaningless at all !!
This plane crashed .... and one propeller at least show a feathered position.
So we can already (under some reserves) know that one engine was shutdown BEFORE the plane crashed.
Why ? .. this will be one duty of the investigation.

[twochai]

All we know is that the engine was not operating when the wreckage photo was taken and the propellor blades appeared to be in the fully feathered position, as they should be.

We do not know whether the feathering occurred pre-crash, or post crash!

[J.O.]

It would be highly irregular for a propeller to go into feather during or after the accident. They tend to stay in the pitch they were at just prior to impact.

[Golden Rivit]

Are these props spring loaded to feather,and metered oil pressure to unfeather/control?

[lomapaseo]

Besides feathering, there is also swirled tip damage to look for at the instant of crash. Then of course a good look at the gearbox, engine blading, and instrument panel is helpful.

[ZimmerFly]

According to the ICAC the primary cause was Severe Icing

After the State Commission has made the analysis of data collected in the data recorder (black box) and evaluated them, as set out in the Convention of Civil Aviation for air accident investigation, in conjunction with the Bureau Survey and Analysis for the Safety of Civil Aviation of France (BEA) and representatives of the aircraft manufacturer ATR, reports that this flight was developing normally until they had extreme weather conditions on the route, following which the aircraft entered a severe icing condition (high concentration of ice) up to 20 000 feet (6 thousand 36 meters), which together with crew error in handling the situation, caused the accident itself.

Nota Informativa del Instituto de Aeronáutica Civil de Cuba (http://www.granma.cubasi.cu/2010/12/16/nacional/artic03.html)

[angels]

This is what Reuters has.

The piece mentions pilot error but doesn't specifically say what the error was (unless I've read it wrong). Perhaps the error was in taking the plane up to 20,000 feet?

HAVANA, Dec 16 (Reuters) - Icing and pilot error caused the Nov. 4 crash of a Cuban Aero Caribbean passenger plane in which the 68 people on board were killed, the Cuban government said on Thursday.
Investigators found that "extreme weather conditions" led to a "severe" build up of ice on the plane that, "combined with errors by the crew in the handling of the situation, caused the accident," the Civil Aeronautics Institute said in a statement.
It said the plane, an ATR 72-212 twin turboprop, built by ATR, a joint venture of Europe's EADS <EAD.PA> and Italian group Finmeccanica <SIFI.MI>, had been in good condition and functioned properly before plummeting to the ground in central Cuba.
On that day, Cuba had the unusual condition of a cold front sweeping down from the north while a small hurricane brushed along the island's eastern tip.
The combination of cold air and very high humidity from the storm created conditions conducive for icing unusual on the tropical island, airplane experts told Reuters.
Most planes flying that day remained at lower altitudes to avoid icing, they said.
The institute said the Aero Caribbean plane flew at 20,000 feet (6,036 metres) after taking off from the eastern city of Santiago en route to Havana on the northwest coast.
The victims included 28 foreigners from 10 countries.
ATR said the plane was 15 years old, had flown almost 25,000 hours and had been operated by state-owned Aero Caribbean since 2006.
The accident was the worst in Cuba since Sept. 3, 1989 when a Soviet-made Ilyushin-62M jet airliner crashed after takeoff from the Havana airport, killing all 126 people on board. (Reporting by Nelson Acosta; Editing by Jeff Franks and Vicki Allen)

[MineDog]

Icing again...

Seems ATR and Icing still do not really like each other, do they?

All icing accidents seem to add 'pilot error'. But what does that really mean: maybe it just means: do not fly into severe icing conditions. No one does this intentionally (except maybe for some test pilots). Might it be that the ATR is still more prone to icing handling problems than the manufacturer wants to admit?

Let us hope we get some better insight after the final report. Seems worth investigating further.

MD

[ECAM_Actions]

Investigators found that "extreme weather conditions" led to a "severe" build up of ice on the plane that, "combined with errors by the crew in the handling of the situation, caused the accident," the Civil Aeronautics Institute said in a statement.
How do you handle severe icing except to turn tail and run/descend into warmer air?

It said the plane, an ATR 72-212 twin turboprop, built by ATR, a joint venture of Europe's EADS <EAD.PA> and Italian group Finmeccanica <SIFI.MI>, had been in good condition and functioned properly before plummeting to the ground in central Cuba.
Aren't they all?

On that day, Cuba had the unusual condition of a cold front sweeping down from the north while a small hurricane brushed along the island's eastern tip.
The combination of cold air and very high humidity from the storm created conditions conducive for icing unusual on the tropical island, airplane experts told Reuters.
Freezing water?

Most planes flying that day remained at lower altitudes to avoid icing, they said.
Define "low"?

The institute said the Aero Caribbean plane flew at 20,000 feet (6,036 metres) after taking off from the eastern city of Santiago en route to Havana on the northwest coast.
Wouldn't this put them right in the middle of the problem?

The engine looks feathered to me. Severe icing blocking the air intake necessitating/forcing a shutdown? I'd find it highly unlikely the prop feathered after the crash. Also it isn't bent, suggesting it wasn't powered at impact (you'd expect to see bent blades if it was).

I don't think they stood a chance, regardless of pilot actions. Do Cuba have a history of always finding fault with the pilot?

ECAM Actions.

[WHBM]

Can anyone give a technical justification for why the ATR seems to get into difficulties with icing at altitude, whereas other current types do not have a history of losses due to this. There seem to have been at least three other losses of the type (American at Roselawn, FedEx in Texas, ATI at Milan) due to icing.

[Clandestino]

Seems ATR and Icing still do not really like each other, do they?

Find me an aeroplane that performs better iced over than clean. What makes ATR worse than some other members of the flock is:

1) low speed - no significant ram rise to make living easier in icing

2) (relatively) low performance - once iced, its difficult to climb above the icing layer.

3) low weight - heavier aeroplanes pick up less ice than light ones. I'll be damned if I know how it works, yet it's reason behind C-5 having no wing ice protection whatsoever and A-320 having only outboard wing leading edges de-iced.

4) laminar wing - an ice magnet if there was ever one

5) unpowered controls relying on horn balances to reduce hinge moment

All of these is not enough to make the aeroplane truly dangerous. The missing ingredient is ignorant pilot to make the combination deadly. The last crew of the N401AM being exception, they were the test pilots, flying in icing conditions that were rare and previously undiscovered (they were light to moderate) without ever realizing that.

How do you handle severe icing except to turn tail and run/descend into warmer air? Precisely. With highest Cuban peak being 6476 ft tall, obvious escape route was down. Hopefully the investigation will reveal why it wasn't taken timely.

Severe icing is defined as one that overwhelms the aeroplane's deicing system. Obviously, whether the icing is considered severe is not just dependent on the state of the atmosphere but also on the aeroplane's equipment. Areas of severe icing at altitude are quite limited, in horizontal, vertical and temporal sense and are impossible to predict. Metman might warn that conditions are conductive to severe icing, but forecasting where and when it will strike is beyond the ability of current meteorology. Therefore the only procedure when one stumbles on severe icing is to run away.

Severe icing blocking the air intake necessitating/forcing a shutdown?

Very unlikely. Courtesy of mr EK Gann, we know it was issue with DC-2, however, ATR's intake is a bit larger than Douglas' air scoop so chances of it icing over completely are minimal. ATRs employ de-icing boot around intake and S-duct, acting as centrifugal separator for ice shrapnel trying to make its way to the engine.

Can anyone give a technical justification for why the ATR seems to get into difficulties with icing at altitude, whereas other current types do not have a history of losses due to this. There seem to have been at least three other losses of the type (American at Roselawn, FedEx in Texas, ATI at Milan) due to icing.

I can't give any justification why ATR gets into difficulties with icing at altitude except those given earlier in the post. As to why it seems to have more problems than other types, I'd say it's cognitive bias. SAABs and Brasilias have histories of roll anomalies, some heavy turboprops of yesteryear were prone to tailplane stalls in icing and it took us a couple of decades to discover it. ATR got bad rap because of Roselawn, which is disappointing, yet unsurprising as discussion we had on PPRuNe regarding it has shown some ignorance on the part of (alleged) aerospace professionals. What chance had Joe Public, whose comprehension horizon ended at the fact that Americans were killed while flying in French-built aeroplane.

Mt. st Pietro crash was attempt to force the aeroplane somewhere where it just wasn't able to go, icing was only accessory. Both pilots came from DC-9 and were unaccustomed to ATR's low performance.

Regarding the Lubbock, methinks NTSB video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xk4hak6NVKE) makes great CRM teaching tool. Watch it an be shocked.

I have earned my keep through five European winters and six summers in the front right seat of ATR 42-300. Fact that I'm able to write this post says something about soundness of the design.

[twochai]

Excellent observations, Clandestino.

1) low speed - no significant ram rise to make living easier in icing

Very true.

(relatively) low performance - once iced, its difficult to climb above the icing layer.

Also a fact of life.

low weight - heavier aeroplanes pick up less ice than light ones. I'll be damned if I know how it works, yet it's reason behind C-5 having no wing ice protection whatsoever and A-320 having only outboard wing leading edges de-iced.

In fact, I think it has more to do with the size of the exposed surfaces, than the aircraft's weight. A wing with a large leading edge radius is much less susceptible to performance loss in icing conditions than a wing with a small radius leading edge (all else being equal, which of course it never is).

laminar wing - an ice magnet if there was ever one

Some airfoil profiles are certainly more susceptible to performance degradation in ice than others, as has been well established through the years.

It is also instructive to review the Roselawn accident report, particularly its conclusions:

ASN Aircraft accident Aérospatiale/Aeritalia ATR-72-212 N401AM Roselawn, IN (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19941031-1)

[Montrealguy]

Seems ATR and Icing still do not really like each other, do they?

All icing accidents seem to add 'pilot error'. But what does that really mean: maybe it just means: do not fly into severe icing conditions. No one does this intentionally (except maybe for some test pilots). Might it be that the ATR is still more prone to icing handling problems than the manufacturer wants to admit?

ATR-42s have been operated non-stop in Canada since around 1990. Thats 20 years and no crashes.

[Green Guard]

low weight - heavier aeroplanes pick up less ice than light ones. I'll be damned if I know how it works, yet it's reason behind C-5 having no wing ice protection whatsoever and A-320 having only outboard wing leading edges de-iced.

In fact, I think it has more to do with the size of the exposed surfaces, than the aircraft's weight. A wing with a large leading edge radius is much less susceptible to performance loss in icing conditions than a wing with a small radius leading edge (all else being equal, which of course it never is).



Both somewhat right but not quite.

Weight has nothing to do with ICE but the size does.
Bigger size =longer wing span= thicker leading edge= MORE ICE = less ICE on wings !!!

Why ?
Because shorter span allowes much less bending of the wing.

More bending on the wing will shed all the ice in pieces downstream...

[VFD]

Can anyone give a technical justification for why the ATR seems to get into difficulties with icing at altitude, whereas other current types do not have a history of losses due to this
I believe that there were modifications to the de-iceing boots after the Roselawn accident. Do we know if this plane had the modifications?
ATR-42s have been operated non-stop in Canada since around 1990. Thats 20 years and no crashes.
About the only areas in Canada that generally can form Rime Ice is just along the coastlines. Profound difference between cold, snow vs -1c rime conditions.

VFD

[twochai]

About the only areas in Canada that generally can form Rime Ice is just along the coastlines. Profound difference between cold, snow vs -1c rime conditions

You're ignoring the area surrounding the great lakes, which are both Canadian and American - probably the biggest rime ice generators in the conditions you're talking about!

[pattern_is_full]

Let's face it. Icing over a tropical island (except in CBs, which are avoided for other reasons) is probably one of those once-in-a-career events. Just as flying into volcanic ash over Europe was a never-in-a-career event (until - oops! - it happened).

It just rose up to bite this crew, whereas a crew recently transferred from, say, Ontario, might have been more alert to the possibility and more familiar with appropriate responses.

[no-hoper]

A lot of good posts so fare.Except the one with the bending wings-sorry.From the maintenance side i want to add some of my experience what can go wrong with the systems.The worst failures and bad condition of the equipment i found in areas where
icing conditions are very rare with very little need to use anti/de icing.Even procedures
to switch on these systems ones a day or week wont garanty they will work properly
when it counts.

De-icing boots don't like to be exposed to the sun all day.Found them working on ground at 30° C satis,next flight (thunderstorms all around with heavy hale) a total of
8 meters leading edge failed and had to be replaced due to weak rubber.

Some of the valves supplying pressure and suction to the boots (dual distributor valves) are heated with 115 V ACW- but no indication if there is problem with the heating.
You will find out in icing conditions when the valve gets stuck...

Electrical heated prop blades don't like moisture when their surface is very little damaged only.Have seen the local guys doing a test in the hangar.All good of course.When they asked me to sign for the job i did the test again and put water on the blades-nice blue sparks were coming out of the heating element.2 of 8 blades had to be replaced...

Another issue are "frozen" powerlever on the ATR.Happens often - a special grease
needs to be applied on the linkage in the aft upper nacelle.I know 3 companys who don't know the partnumber of the grease and never ordered or used it.

But even with the correct grease applied the lever can freeze due to the critical design of the cooling duct on top of the nacelle.If this panel is not correct sealed,or
the internal duct is leaking you get a lot water direct on the quadrant and the power lever will freeze.

Hope this was not too boring.

Due to the picture showing one prop in feather there are two options in my mind:

1: they had a problem with at least one prop blade leading to heavy vibration-
engine shut down.

2: they tried to leave FL 200 but couldn't retard the frozen powerlever-
Fire handle pulled,engine shut down.

[ZFT]

The TransAsia flight 791 ATR accident report makes interesting reading. Interestingly this icing accident is (almost) never referred to.

[I_know_nothing]

Are Cubana able to obtain Pratt & Whitney engine parts for the ATR through official channels, notwithstanding the US embargo on exports to Cuba ? Does assembly of these engines in Montreal manage to get around these restrictions.
In short, yes. Having been to Cuba, it's lousy with Canadians who seem to love it that their trading links are running so well in the face of the US embargo. As you say (or at least imply) there's a version of the ATR fitted with Pratt and Witney Canada engines.

[ZFT]

As you say (or at least imply) there's a version of the ATR fitted with Pratt and Witney Canada engines.

Yes 42-200, 42-300, 42,320, 42-400, 42-500, 42-600, 72-100, 72-200, 72-210,72-500 & 72-600

[WHBM]

I believe that there were modifications to the de-iceing boots after the Roselawn accident. Do we know if this plane had the modifications?
Almost certainly yes, because the Roselawn accident was in 1994, and this aircraft was new in 1995, to Continental in the USA. If the mod wasn't around at time of manufacture it would have been incorpoated while on the US register. The aircraft passed on to Binter in the Canaries in 1999, and to Aerocaribbean in 2006.

[Mago]

Here is an unofficial reconstruction of the accident:

YouTube - Reconstrucción del Accidente Aéreo de Cuba. Vuelo 883 deun ATR 72-212 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoN8NFhb-Qs&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

Is in spanish.

[J.O.]

That video is quite disturbing and very telling. Many similarities to the Roselawn accident.

RIP

[henra]

Looks indeed alarmingly like Roselawn and the other ATR Icing accidents.
Is it 100% confirmed that the AD's following Roselwan have been implemented in this particular AC ?
Normally icing shouldn't be of much consideration in Cuba, so installing the improved boots might not have been very high on their agenda !?
IIRC the delivery of this Aircraft was in '96 so it has probably been delivered with the old (i.e. short) ones.
Would be worrying if it happened with the improved ones.

Unfortunately my Spanish is non- existing, so I haven't understood if they disconnected the AP when performing the change of course. Could anyone fiigure out from the caption?

At the end of the descent it looked like a deep stall. Would somehow fit to the wreckage which seemed to bne within a pretty limited area.
I wasn't aware the ATR is susceptible to deep stall. However with a T- Tail that wouldn't be to unlikely

[Setandcheck]

Most probably the AP disconnected by itself, due to hi roll demand caused by huge ice accretion on the surface. During the whole incident is clearly audible the stall warning sound, it didn't stop a second. When ice accretion is so vaste, surface is deeply modified and recovery is pretty much impossible.
Being an ATR driver, back and forth over the Alps, since 2001, I can tell that the amount of ice accretion with this AC is really unpredictable. Deicing and antiicing system are up to date, but it looks like every single drop of ice can be collected easily.

R.I.P.

[pattern_is_full]

So if I'm reading that right, there was a 2:45-minute delay between the request for a lower altitude (FL 160, <<por engelamiento>> "due to icing"), and the ATC permission to turn (but NOT immediately descend, due to oncoming traffic, originally at 78 miles, at FL 190). Roughly 5 minutes in total from the first Ice Detect warning.

I have no clue what the realities are for pilots in Cuba who deviate from ATC - but I might have pulled an "American Airlines" here and said - "We ARE descending to FL160 - Emergency due to icing - get everyone out of our way!"

[Hotel Tango]

Actually, as I understood it, ATC gave information on the conflicting traffic and offered to vector them (to enable an earlier descent). The problem was that the crew didn't hear or react to the first offer. ATC had to repeat herself after 1st reconfirming which a/c was requesting descent as there seemed to be a little confusion at one point.

[skysign]

From the video when they select de-ice / anti-ice on a master caution is on the cap ( unable to see which one but I bet it is anti-icing ) & stay on the cap even after selecting level 3.
I would like to know also if the stick pusher came on ( Probably since shaker was on ), did the flap was set at 15* after the ac start rolling, is max power was added. I do not speak spanish and the video alone leave a lot of question unanswered. I am just trying to get more informations from this misfortune.

We have a run from Miami to Jamaica in my company as well as up north all the way to Duluth minesota, and I can tell you that one of the worse icing ( Clear ice) I have ever seen was over the Caribbean also it is rare occurence the formation is extremely quick.

[skysign]

I did make comment on the video. But where that video come from ? Is it what really happened ?
I just talk to our director of safety and as of today no final report as been made. So no ATR operator has receive any infos from ATR on this accident.
He said that early assumption was : severe downdraft ( microburst ) due to Thunderstorm, but has always will have to wait the final report.

[costamaia]

Unfortunately my Spanish is non- existing, so I haven't understood if they disconnected the AP when performing the change of course. Could anyone fiigure out from the caption?

AP apparently disconnected at 4' 09 in the tape (?), followed by "Voy a cogerlo porque esta girando" (I'm getting it because it´s turning)

[pattern_is_full]

Hotel tango - you are correct in that there were other factors also contributing to that comm delay: flight ID confusion among other things.

[twochai]

But where that video come from ? Is it what really happened ?


That video would certainly appear to be a standard dump from the Flight Data Recorder. Yes, it looks genuine.

[MountainBear]

Spanish is not my native language but I do understand some of it. There are two issues that I have questions on. First, if I understand the tape correctly there was a minute and 47 second delay after ice was detected and before the de-icing system was turned on. Does everyone else understand the tape that way? Second, when ATC asks for the first time if the crew wants vectors to avoid oncoming traffic the flight deck's reply to this question is "bueno". Is that the standard reply? Wouldn't it be "si"? Again, my grasp of Spanish (let alone the Cuban variety) isn't perfect but to my amateur ear that seems a confusing reply in that situation.

[twochai]

my grasp of Spanish (let alone the Cuban variety) isn't perfect but to my amateur ear that seems a confusing reply in that situation

Bear:

Saying 'bueno' in those circumstances would equate to a gringo saying "OK", or "Go for it" in colloquial Spanish.

TC

[MountainBear]

Saying 'bueno' in those circumstances would equate to a gringo saying "OK", or "Go for it" in colloquial Spanish. TCYes, that's the way I understand also. But is that the standard response? It seems rather informal. There's a reason that callbacks and read backs are standardized. It's to eliminate confusion when people are under stress.

Watch the the video carefully. ATC tells him (a) the location of on-coming traffic and then (b) asks him a question. His response is "OK". But ok to what? OK that he understood the transmission, ok that he understands the other plane's position, or ok that he wants the vectors. I think it's worth highlighting the fact when, after some delay, ATC asks him the second time if he wants vectors the response from the flight deck is crystal clear: "let's have the vectors." So why didn't he give that response the first time around?

Now that I think about it some more what strikes me most about the video is that the flight crew ascends to FL 200 and almost immediately hits ice. But there seems (and I highlight that word) to be a certain air of casualness in their response to that situation. They don't seem to be in any hurry to get the anti-ice on. They don't seem to be in any hurry to descend. It's almost like the flight deck is in la la land.

Again, that's just the impression I have. I'm not passing judgment. Especially given the language barrier and my ignorance of Cuban ATC.

[costamaia]

Saying 'bueno' in those circumstances would equate to a gringo saying "OK", or "Go for it" in colloquial Spanish. TC
Don't agree.
I understood this "bueno", not as a "OK" or "Roger", but as an expression of weighing options ("Well"...) or waiting for the opinion or confirmation of the other pilot.

[WhatsaLizad?]

We have a run from Miami to Jamaica in my company as well as up north all the way to Duluth minesota, and I can tell you that one of the worse icing ( Clear ice) I have ever seen was over the Caribbean also it is rare occurence the formation is extremely quick.

Skysign,

I will add that icing is a definite hazard present every season over Cuba, the Bahamas and South FL at certain altitudes. Although I spend little time at FL200 while going up or down, but it is very common in the winter in that region to see big white fluffy snowflakes in the lights while they are on from 10K-FL180.

I will also add that the Cuban ATC is very accommodating for weather, turbulence, direct routings and altitude changes. 90% of my flying for a US carrier takes me over the island. My personal joke is that MIA Center works better with Havana Center than they do with JAX Center :)